Last week (19th February): The Delhi High Court embarked on a suo motu case concerning the prolonged time taken by jail authorities to accept bail bonds and release prisoners. This initiative, led by Justice Amit Mahajan, highlights the court’s concerns over unnecessary hindrances in the process of granting bail, particularly in cases necessitating urgent release. By calling for responses from the Director General of Prisons and the Standing Counsel (Criminal) of the Delhi government, the court aims to streamline the process, ensuring that the rights to liberty and speedy justice are not compromised.
NEW DELHI: Last week (19 February), the Delhi High Court initiated suo motu proceedings to tackle the issue of delays by jail authorities in processing bail bonds, thereby hindering the timely release of prisoners who have been granted bail.
Justice Amit Mahajan highlighted the core issue on February 19, expressing perplexity over why jail superintendents require one to two weeks to accept bail bonds, thus delaying the release of accused or convicted individuals. This delay is particularly concerning in cases where bail is granted for urgent reasons, such as medical emergencies. The court emphasized the fundamental objective of bail and sentence suspension: to free individuals from imprisonment without unnecessary delay.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India enshrines the fundamental right to life and personal liberty. It states: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
READ ALSO: Lawyers “Browbeating” Angers Gujarat High Court Judge
The court also pointed out that in efforts to expedite releases, it occasionally instructs that bail bonds be submitted directly to jail superintendents, bypassing the trial court. Such directives aim to facilitate the swift release of prisoners, and any delays in these processes are deemed unacceptable by the judiciary.
During the proceedings, the court called upon the Director General of Prisons and the Standing Counsel (Criminal) of the Delhi Government to provide their insights and responses to this critical issue.
“In certain cases, interim bails are granted on medical grounds or some other exigencies, as expressed by the applicant. In such a scenario, this Court fails to understand why the period of one to two weeks be taken by the jail superintendent for accepting the bail bonds,” the Court said.
This action was prompted by a specific case where a convict’s sentence suspension on February 8 was delayed due to the jail superintendent’s slow bail bond processing. Despite assurances from Nandita Rao, the Additional Standing Counsel for the State of Delhi, that such delays were not the norm, the court found the recurring issue troubling enough to warrant special attention.
READ ALSO: Madras High Court Denies Bail to V. Senthil Balaji in Money Laundering Case
“The Court, while passing bail orders, at times directs that the bail bond be directly furnished to the jail superintendent. The prisoner is not remitted to the trial court in order to facilitate his immediate release. The delay at the instance of the jail superintendent in accepting bail bonds is not acceptable to the conscience of this Court. Let the matter be registered as a sou motu petition and numbered,”
the Court ordered.
The court cites the principle that even a single day’s deprivation of liberty is one too many. With the establishment of the Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records (FASTER) system intended to streamline communication between courts and jail authorities, the persistent delays raise significant concerns.
By registering the matter as a suo motu case, the Delhi High Court has taken step towards ensuring that the rights to liberty and speedy justice are upheld, emphasizing the judiciary’s role in monitoring and rectifying systemic inefficiencies within the legal framework.
CASE TITLE: Court on its own motion v Director General of Prisons, Govt of NCT of Delhi
